Cyril Joseph S.

Sontillano
BSN IV-C ADZU
08 October 2010

Philo 133: SYNTHESIS PAPER

At the start of the semester, I knew everyone had a clue on what students
usually do in a Philosophy class, but this time I thought it was different. Classes
began smoothly, first we were tested on how we see situations, the first situation
that was brought to us was the controversial incidence that happened in a
hospital in Cebu City where a man's privacy was devulged through the use of
camera phones by the staff and doctors. I felt that this situation wasn't even
challenging because at the start it was pretty much one-sided to me. The patient
was the victim and the staff and doctors committed the crime. End of story. But
later on, I was slowly realizing that there is more to that situation, and that there
are a couple of principles which I was well aware of before but i didn't give
importance to them. Health Care Ethics was then formally introduced to us, I was
somehow puzzled because I knew there are “rules” to follow before but it caught
me off guard that I would be very complicated as time passes by. At first it was
really shallow for me, this is ethical this is unethical, but what made it really hard
was the justification on why a particular choice or option would be ethical or
unethical? The thought of justifying my choice made my mind sizzle while I was in
class. Before, I was just certain that something was good and or bad, but when my
classmates somehow presented the other side of the coin to me, I became
uncertain of my choice. So I've basically learned that though things may appear
as simple as they are, when examined and given the chance to be analyzed, there
is more to it that will make you think deeper.

As the discussions went deeper, it made me more interested. Although I

would be occasionally caught doing something else for some time, it didn't totally
distract me from keeping my interest on the subject matter. Then Bioethics was
introduced to us, it was about the proper conduct or proper way of acting.
Bioethics was used to tackle ethical issues regaring life or biology and the
practices emerging from it.

Then Rawls’s Theory of Justice was introduced. John Rawls published a book
called A Theory of Justice. It is a theory that attempts to combine the strengths of
utilitarianism with those of the deontological position of Kant and Ross, while
avoiding the weaknesses of each view. Utilitarianism claims outright that
happiness is fundamental and suggests a direct procedure for answering ethical-
social questions. But it is flawed by its lack of a principle of justice. Kant and Ross
make rightness a fundamental moral notion and stress the ultimate dignity of
human beings. Yet neither provides a workable method for solving problems in
social morality.

From one Philosopher to another, we tackled the different principles that

they discovered or invented. I've learned that the principle of Utilitariansm states
that actions are right in proportion as they tend to promote happiness, wrong as
they tend to produce the reverse of happiness. Act utilitarianism holds that the
principle should be applied to particular acts in a particular circumstances. Rule
utilitarianism maintains that the principle should be used to test rules, which can
in turn be used to decide the rightness of particular acts. On the other hand, For
Kant, the consequences of an action are morally irrelevant. Rather, an action is
right when it is in accordance with a rule that satisfies a principle he calls the
“categorical imperative.” Morality for Kant, does not rest on results, such as the
production of happiness- but neither does it rest on our feelings, impulses, or
inclinations. An action is right, only when it is done for the sake of duty.

Of course, how can I forget the moment where you woul;d instill everything
that you have learned so far during that point through a Moral Deliberation, I
found it really easy to decide but as usual, when it is already at the justification I
will really have doubts and second thoughts, I guess that's the beauty of
Philosophy, it makes you wonder and doubt a lot.

The lecture about bioethical principles was a lot of fun, to consider the
amount of fun discussions, role plays and even argumentations during this topic.
The principle of Justice, Veracity, Confidentiality, Autonomy, Informed consent,
Beneficence, Nonmaleficence and Paternalism were made known to us, they were
already familiar to us but we dug deeper in these principles which is for me very
important because we will utilize these someday when we are already practicing
our profession. It practically changed my perspective on things, I will now identify
which principle I'm using and I'm violating especially when I am encountering an
ethical dilemma.

Althought the whole semester was filled with entertaining discussions, I

believe the last few days were the most exciting part of philo class, informal
debate. We had the chance to actually voice out what we felt was right regarding
our sexes, battle of the sexes always make me hyped and informal debates have
always been my favorite part in classess. It was really entertaining, I did not only
get to hear my classmate's opinions and the manner how they would defend their
side, but the fact that I feel hypoxia whenever I talk and deliver our points make it
more challenging, try to sound, look and appear credible when deep inside you're
struggling to combat stage fright and fear of public speaking. Well, not totally, I
just feel really weird when I get excited and I can feel the adrenaline rushing
through my veins. But what was more exciting is the fact that there was actually
two moral orientations being tested while we were all blabbering. I just didn't
expect that the “explanation” would be that close to the actual thing that we were
doing. And I was not surprised that these two orientations still exist nowadays and
there has not been a significant change in the results. Boys are still boys, and girls
are still girls but sometimes both sexes adapt qualities of the other.

At the end of the day, the philo class made us more aware of the things that
we used to ignore. The things that we knew existed but we did not give
importance like the different principles and theories. This time, we are smarter.
When we encounter situations that require us to choose, we will not only choose
this or that because we wanted to, but because we have thought about it, its
possible consequences, the influences that the different principles have on us and
of course considering the different angles of the story. As nurses, I believe it was
really helpful because it made us more equipped when it comes to decision-
making, which is an essential element when rendering care to our patients.